h a l f b a k e r yJust add oughta.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Men are more likely to leave a woman with children than a
woman leave a man with her children.
Men don't like paying for other men's offspring. It's kind of
cuckoldry
But I still think everyone should help raise children.
The next generation's goodness and selfishness is
determined by
the upbringing of the children which is
partly the parents but also culture.
It's the responsibility of the parents to care for and provide
for their children. But it takes a village, town, country to
raise a child in the way to go in life. Leaving the
responsibility to parents is why there are so many poorly
brought up children. We've tried leaving the responsibility
to parents and it clearly has not worked. Look at the state
of people in the world.
But it's better for society if there is a childcarer with a
career and two parents with a career. More taxes can be
paid.
Two parents should be capable of working full time and
coming home at 6 or 8 if they commute long range and
care being provided from the end of school until this time.
The education system can provide the facilities for the
care but the staff doesn't necessarily need to be teachers.
Childcare workers deserve a living wage as caring for
children is difficult socially useful WORK.
Houses are not affordable and would be parents put off
having children due to expense and childcare.
Women are inordinately affected by childcare as they are
usually the one left responsible for children as men leave
them.
We have a cultural epidemic where it is acceptable for man
to leave a woman with his offspring.
This is wrong for the child.
Why should women sacrifice their skills and careers and
earning potential to look after children? They also become
dependent on their partners.
It would be more equal society if childcare was balanced
across society. Rich people benefit from poor people's
children as they're often the people doing the jobs they pay
for and don't want to do themselves such as cleaning and
meal delivery.
House prices are so not affordable that a single parent
household cannot afford childcare and housing at the
same time. Subsidising childcare would allow single
mothers to go to work.
Web search for "subsidised childcare"
https://duckduckgo....childcare%22&ia=web
Please do some research before posting. [DrBob, May 14 2022]
Factors affecting the HIV/AIDS epidemic
https://www.ncbi.nl...rticles/PMC3824495/
[DrBob, May 14 2022]
58% of cases
https://www.hiv.uw....gy/core-concept/all
small population more than 1/2 of cases [4and20, May 16 2022]
[link]
|
| |
As a small government libertarian you'd think I
wouldn't support this but I do. I think investing in
families is a good thing. |
|
| |
I just don't trust the government to do it right, but
[+] for the basic premise. |
|
| |
Do I believe that education and a minimum standard of living should be provided by any country in question? |
|
| |
That said, I am the exception to your rules. |
|
| |
My dad booked when I was seven, single mom latch-keyed me and my little brother until evil step-dad showed up.
Shit got worse and we got tossed to the wolves. |
|
| |
Now I'm not saying that was a good thing or a bad thing...
I'm just saying that if things had been different, I would not be man I am. |
|
| |
Maybe I would be a better man... but maybe I would be much worse. |
|
| |
In a multi-verse you get to experience all possibilities. |
|
| |
This reality is just one of them...
...and you can manipulate it any way that you wish. |
|
| |
Light socialism is hardly a Halfbakery idea. [Marked-for-
Deletion] let's all. |
|
| |
I don't know which way you or anyone else tends to swing, but economies and the media have been swinging against population increase for decades, with the exception of countries such as Japan which had the "problem" of having nearly no children at all. |
|
| |
Abortion, AIDS, all the west going homosexual, Covid, global warming -- someone didn't like children at all down there. (Edit: I forgot to mention 2-income households. Call me crazy, but I think parents should raise their own children, unless they're too stupid to actually educate them.) |
|
| |
Will population increase become a thing? Will people start swinging in the old way again? |
|
| |
So... public boarding school. |
|
| |
[marked-for-deletion] advocacy |
|
| |
[4and20] I think population increase and decrease is correlated to the carrying capacity of the economy which is correlated to the availability of free energy. I think energy is getting harder to access and therefore population levels will naturally plateau and decline. Hopefully gradually rather than suddenly. |
|
| |
[chron] Your idea in general is already widely implemented for the past century or more, in the form of the public school system. |
|
| |
Also your comments on high house prices are misguided; house prices are driven by the availability and cost of credit, and the wages available to service that credit, because (like rent) most people pay as much per month as they can manage, to secure the best housing they can. |
|
| |
//We've tried leaving the responsibility to parents and it clearly has not worked. Look at the state of people in the world.//
That's a pretty big claim. I think you need to back that up with some solid evidence.
//AIDS, all the west going homosexual//
Your grip on statistics, biological science & reality are all pretty tenuous, it seems.
I agree with the call for deletion. Subsidised childcare is baked. |
|
| |
You're right. France, for example, has gone less homosexual. The French used to say that the British have always been homosexual. There may be some truth to it. It may be all the sailors confined to ships, schoolboys in public schools, James I, etc., or maybe just too much time together in the military or prisons, Greek-style. |
|
| |
As for statistics, at least according to official counts, AIDS has killed 36.3 million people, whereas Covid has killed "only" 6.3 million. So what has been the response of leaders, educators, and media in certain western countries? Encourage people and children to embrace homosexuality. Just sayin. |
|
| |
//Encourage people and children to embrace homosexuality.//
Utter rubbish. There's a big difference between trying to eliminate prejudice by educating people & what I take to be your inference that people are somehow being magically converted into homosexuals.
I am sure that you will be disappointed to know that more heterosexuals contract AIDS each year than homosexuals and that "HIV prevalence rate is the highest in the Africa region with lowest contraceptive prevalence rate, lowest physicians density, highest adolescent fertility rate and lowest mean year of schooling. On the other hand, HIV prevalence rate is seen the lowest in the European region with highest contraceptive prevalence rate, highest physicians density, lowest adolescent fertility rate and highest mean year of schooling." *
* This is a quote from the study in the link provided above. |
|
| |
Codswallop. The origins of HIV/AIDS are typically self-reported. You're never going to get an accurate number for homosexual transmission, especially in the Africa region, especially if you have high interacrid sex lives. That's the other Anglo-Saxon fetish: dubious numbers. |
|
| |
You may get closer to self-reported truth in some western countries, but the list of HIV prevalence cohort factors (taken from the study?) would seem to encompass hetero practices. What percentage of prevalence in Europe or any country has homosexual origins? |
|
| |
Finally, that study was sponsored by a university department in Malaysia and outright states that Muslim cultural restrictions will decelerate the spread of HIV. I'm not saying they're Anglo-Saxon or wrong, but I am not Muslim and am not planning to join in. |
|
| |
It's not magic, although you may think it's magical. |
|
| |
//I am not Muslim//
Neither am I, & whilst I agree that you always need to be wary of who is carrying out 'science' & their motivations, the quote I used mentions neither religion or sexual identity. |
|
| |
// I think population increase and decrease is correlated to the carrying capacity of the economy which is correlated to the availability of free energy. I think energy is getting harder to access and therefore population levels will naturally plateau and decline. Hopefully gradually rather than suddenly.// |
|
| |
hmmmm, I think the opposite might be true.
While I agree that the increase or decrease of population corresponds to economy I think you will find that, historically speaking, baby-booms happen during the most stressful times in history, or more accurately when there are few people with land to fill. The American great depression is a good example. Huge baby boom. Bad economy... lots of land. |
|
| |
Post [8th of 7] you, [4and20], have become the leading
purveyor to this site of weird ethnocentric rants. But about
your own ethnos you are as coy as a carp. Would you like to
share, or do you need to keep your mystery? |
|
| |
All I can say is that I am not French. |
|
| |
Right [2F] but I'm talking century by century correlation over the last few hundred thousand years, rather than people shagging more when they are out of work. |
|
| |